W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2006

Re: RFC2616bis question: is the reference to RFC1123 normative?

From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2006 21:11:23 +0000
Message-ID: <4575E07B.7010708@isode.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>

Julian Reschke wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm currently going through all the references in RFC2616, trying to 
> decide whether they are normative or informative (a distinction that 
> wasn't made when RFC2616 was published, but which is required nowadays).
>
> The reference to RFC1123 ("Requirements for Internet Hosts -- 
> Communication Layers") is a case where I find myself disagreeing with 
> the classification made by Jim Gettys in 
> draft-gettys-http-v11-spec-rev-00.
>
> RFC2616 cites RFC1123 for
>
> (1) the definition of the rfc1123-date format, and
>
> (2) the definition of "mailbox"; as used in the "From" header.
>
> For (1), it's IMHO just an informative reference, as RFC2616 really 
> uses  only a subset of the RFC1123 format, and has it's own ABNF 
> definition for it.
>
> For (2), RFC2616bis should cite RFC2822, Section 3.4 instead.

This seems correct.
Received on Tuesday, 5 December 2006 21:11:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:49:53 GMT